1.

there are people who have something to say - a message.

2.

the image is the visual form of the message, which is expressed through the media.

3.

each era has its own means for disseminating messages - each has its own media.  the media changes: sometimes it tends to become the message itself, sometimes it is of no importance compared to the message.

4.

the technology of printing was invented 500 years ago, making it possible quickly to produce copies of a message and to make it accessible for large number of people. 

5.

a definition of graphic arts - it is a branch of art in which the message is expressed through the medium of print.

6.

times have changed.  the medium of print has become hopelessly slow for messages that rush (without managing to nor wishing to record themselves) to those who await them, or to those who do not await them. they disappear once and for all.

7.

we live in an age of perishing messages.

8.

the only way to save the message is to fix it - to write it down, to draw it, to engrave it in metal or to give it a visible shape. 

later, when the message has lost the charm of its novelty, there may be redemption in the message itself, but the image must be given back to the message.

it is not important how many answers we have.

they do not interest everybody.

it is much more important to find questions that interest many.

we ask:

do the so-called old media of graphic art conceal yet undiscovered opportunities within themselves? 

are the graphic arts capable of using new media creatively or are they doomed to follow in the tracks of others? 

how do new media and a new environment and attitude transform the image? 

how can the image survive in the conditions of the prevailing position of textuality? 

how has the image transformed, or mutated, as media change? 

does the mutation, or transformation, of the image take place as a result of developments in the media or as a counterbalance to such development?